PDA

View Full Version : Communist Molests Daughter


| I, CWAS
12-26-2006, 08:48 PM
http://www.alternet.org/story/45276/

Bettina Aptheker adored her political, erudite father, who was a well-known Communist. "When I was a little girl I wanted to be just like my father," Aptheker writes. "Whatever he did, I did, or tried to do." And one thing that Herbert Aptheker did extremely well, according to Bettina, was to deny any reality he didn't want to acknowledge.

Emulating her father, then, meant sharing his denial of the many questionable political realities, evading intellectual complexities she could not yet articulate, ignoring her own feminist observations of women's lives, restraining her sexual desire for women and, most of all, repressing childhood memories of her father's sexual abuse.

Determined to be his loyal, perfect daughter, Aptheker writes that she repressed this memory, so that she could function in her father's world. Her denial allowed her to become one of the few female leaders of the Free Speech Movement at UC Berkeley in 1964 and to play a major role in the trial of her childhood friend and comrade Angela Davis, who was acquitted of murder charges. Her denial of her deepest desires and memories also allowed her to marry and raise two children.

But denial eventually catches up. Outside, Bettina Aptheker appeared confident and productive. Inside, she lived with constant anxiety and serious depression. "Incest survivors know despair," she writes. "It is not your ordinary run-of-the-mill despair. ... It's a different feeling. All through childhood, all through my twenties, I had this feeling. It was bottomless, endless, bone-deep, down to the marrow. I choked on it, fell prostrate with it. It was connected to a self-loathing so deep, so limitless, so without end that suicide seemed the only possible relief."

As she began to sift through her childhood materials and memories to write her memoir, Intimate Politics: How I Grew Up Red, Fought for Free Speech and Became a Feminist Rebel, Aptheker suddenly remembered what she had repressed all those years. The memory was not recovered by therapy; it just suddenly appeared, and she collapsed to the ground:

"My father and I played other games too, beside baseball. I was three or four years old when we began playing 'choo-choo train.' ... My father was behind me, and then the train arrived 'at the station,' and we had to wait for the 'passengers' to get off and on. Our train rocked back and forth, back and forth, and my father had his right arm tightly around me. He was the 'locomotive' even though he was behind me. Our train shuddered just before it was supposed to leave 'the station,' except it didn't leave. ... And then he stood me up and we went into the bathroom and he washed me off, very gently. It didn't hurt. He never hurt me. And I knew not to tell. As I grew bigger we played different games, but they all had the shudder. Older still, I knew it was not a game. I still knew not to tell because he told me 'terrible things will happen.' My father stopped molesting me when I was thirteen and we moved to a new house."

Soon after I read this shocking revelation, a colleague asked me whether it was really necessary for her to reveal this incest to the world. The answer, I believe, is that Bettina Aptheker's life and intellectual biography make no sense without understanding what she suffered and repressed. Although she describes this incest in one short account, it is a thread running through her efforts to become her own person.

Her revelation is not an act of vengeance. Nor does she write with rancor, but rather with boundless love and forgiveness that grew as she acknowledged her love for women, embraced feminism and moved in new intellectual directions. She never brought it up for discussion with her father. On the contrary, it was Herbert Aptheker, during the last year of his life, who asked if he had hurt her during her childhood. She told him the truth, and assured him that she had long forgiven him. He believed her, but couldn't remember the events. Gradually, that changed:

"After his heart attack, still in the hospital, he said, 'you've forgiven me.' It wasn't a question. It was a statement. I said, 'Yes, I have forgiven you.' He made the statement repeatedly in the months following, reassuring himself. That was how I came to realize that he had hid own knowledge of the incest. It was always present in his consciousness, just under the surface, as it had been in mine."

To be a successful and loyal daughter, Bettina Aptheker needed to repress these childhood memories. As she freed herself of her father's rigid Marxist worldview, she gained a new freedom to integrate a feminist analysis into her intellectual work, to embrace aspects of her Jewish heritage, as well as Buddhist practices, and to create a lasting partnership with a woman who "taught her the meaning of hope."

Though she describes episodes of debilitating despair, Aptheker's stunning memoir is not primarily about incest; it is ultimately a political, intellectual and emotional story of one woman's redemption. Once read, it is not easily forgotten.

Oblisk
12-27-2006, 12:46 AM
I stopped reading after "well-known Communist"

Johnson
12-27-2006, 02:49 AM
As she freed herself of her father's rigid Marxist worldview, she gained a new freedom to integrate a feminist analysis into her intellectual work, to embrace aspects of her Jewish heritage, as well as Buddhist practices, and to create a lasting partnership with a woman who "taught her the meaning of hope."

lol, is it just me, or does this story read like a form letter? In that I mean, it seems like it can be applied to pretty much any Jewish woman out there...

Odysseus
12-29-2006, 07:40 AM
Fucking pathetic propaganda.

Captain Marinesko
12-29-2006, 08:21 AM
Looks like something from the Birchers.

Straight Satan
12-29-2006, 10:03 AM
Awards: Order of Lenin, for getting banned from VNN. Three Orders of the Red Banner for getting banned from Stormfront three times.

It's funny, I was on Stormfront arguing with the Nutzis and out of laziness I cut and pasted part of a Marinesko piece...and I promptly got banned! The post had referred to Duke as a "loser" :rofl: oops.

Yeah Jasa's Partisans are still waging war against the reactionaries and neo-cons on SF.

Captain Marinesko
12-29-2006, 11:48 AM
It's funny, I was on Stormfront arguing with the Nutzis and out of laziness I cut and pasted part of a Marinesko piece...and I promptly got banned! The post had referred to Duke as a "loser" :rofl: oops.

Yeah Jasa's Partisans are still waging war against the reactionaries and neo-cons on SF.


I think the what got you banned was attacking David Duke; I'm not sure that the banning had much to do with me, however, I do unfortunately have certain habits and people usually spot me pretty quickly. I have been banned under:

J.P. Slovjanski (Long time ago)
Year Zero(I think that was the second name)
Finis Coronat Opus

The second banning happened because Don Black as well as others knew it was me. The third could have happened for the same reason but I think it was because I kept arguing with Celtic Patriot.

That was stragely around the time when I officially decided to cease being associated with the "movement" ideologically.

<flame deleted>
12-29-2006, 03:27 PM
Looks like something from the Birchers.

Yep. They that tell that Herbert the father was a jew. Of course that would explain a lot.

Captain Marinesko
12-29-2006, 06:57 PM
Father of the Birchers? That was Robert Welch.

<flame deleted>
12-29-2006, 07:03 PM
Father of the Birchers? That was Robert Welch.

I mean the communist who molested his daughter was a jew.

Hlinkova Garda
12-29-2006, 07:29 PM
http://www.alternet.org/story/45276/

Bettina Aptheker adored her political, erudite father, who was a well-known Communist. "When I was a little girl I wanted to be just like my father," Aptheker writes. "Whatever he did, I did, or tried to do." And one thing that Herbert Aptheker did extremely well, according to Bettina, was to deny any reality he didn't want to acknowledge.

Emulating her father, then, meant sharing his denial of the many questionable political realities, evading intellectual complexities she could not yet articulate, ignoring her own feminist observations of women's lives, restraining her sexual desire for women and, most of all, repressing childhood memories of her father's sexual abuse.

Determined to be his loyal, perfect daughter, Aptheker writes that she repressed this memory, so that she could function in her father's world. Her denial allowed her to become one of the few female leaders of the Free Speech Movement at UC Berkeley in 1964 and to play a major role in the trial of her childhood friend and comrade Angela Davis, who was acquitted of murder charges. Her denial of her deepest desires and memories also allowed her to marry and raise two children.

But denial eventually catches up. Outside, Bettina Aptheker appeared confident and productive. Inside, she lived with constant anxiety and serious depression. "Incest survivors know despair," she writes. "It is not your ordinary run-of-the-mill despair. ... It's a different feeling. All through childhood, all through my twenties, I had this feeling. It was bottomless, endless, bone-deep, down to the marrow. I choked on it, fell prostrate with it. It was connected to a self-loathing so deep, so limitless, so without end that suicide seemed the only possible relief."

As she began to sift through her childhood materials and memories to write her memoir, Intimate Politics: How I Grew Up Red, Fought for Free Speech and Became a Feminist Rebel, Aptheker suddenly remembered what she had repressed all those years. The memory was not recovered by therapy; it just suddenly appeared, and she collapsed to the ground:

"My father and I played other games too, beside baseball. I was three or four years old when we began playing 'choo-choo train.' ... My father was behind me, and then the train arrived 'at the station,' and we had to wait for the 'passengers' to get off and on. Our train rocked back and forth, back and forth, and my father had his right arm tightly around me. He was the 'locomotive' even though he was behind me. Our train shuddered just before it was supposed to leave 'the station,' except it didn't leave. ... And then he stood me up and we went into the bathroom and he washed me off, very gently. It didn't hurt. He never hurt me. And I knew not to tell. As I grew bigger we played different games, but they all had the shudder. Older still, I knew it was not a game. I still knew not to tell because he told me 'terrible things will happen.' My father stopped molesting me when I was thirteen and we moved to a new house."

Soon after I read this shocking revelation, a colleague asked me whether it was really necessary for her to reveal this incest to the world. The answer, I believe, is that Bettina Aptheker's life and intellectual biography make no sense without understanding what she suffered and repressed. Although she describes this incest in one short account, it is a thread running through her efforts to become her own person.

Her revelation is not an act of vengeance. Nor does she write with rancor, but rather with boundless love and forgiveness that grew as she acknowledged her love for women, embraced feminism and moved in new intellectual directions. She never brought it up for discussion with her father. On the contrary, it was Herbert Aptheker, during the last year of his life, who asked if he had hurt her during her childhood. She told him the truth, and assured him that she had long forgiven him. He believed her, but couldn't remember the events. Gradually, that changed:

"After his heart attack, still in the hospital, he said, 'you've forgiven me.' It wasn't a question. It was a statement. I said, 'Yes, I have forgiven you.' He made the statement repeatedly in the months following, reassuring himself. That was how I came to realize that he had hid own knowledge of the incest. It was always present in his consciousness, just under the surface, as it had been in mine."

To be a successful and loyal daughter, Bettina Aptheker needed to repress these childhood memories. As she freed herself of her father's rigid Marxist worldview, she gained a new freedom to integrate a feminist analysis into her intellectual work, to embrace aspects of her Jewish heritage, as well as Buddhist practices, and to create a lasting partnership with a woman who "taught her the meaning of hope."

Though she describes episodes of debilitating despair, Aptheker's stunning memoir is not primarily about incest; it is ultimately a political, intellectual and emotional story of one woman's redemption. Once read, it is not easily forgotten.

what a load of DUNG sounds like something you would find on a Pro-USA/Bush Blog

Steppenwolf
12-29-2006, 08:09 PM
This is typical of communists.

Daniel Shays
12-29-2006, 08:11 PM
Why is this in highbrow? Someone please toss it in the gutter.

wonder cow
12-30-2006, 02:34 PM
Good post CWAS.

How common do you think incidences of child molestation and incest and other degeneracy is among those who practice or advocate extremely statist ideologies like communism? [As compared with populations that adhere more to individualism.]

There may be a connection due to a prevalent attitude in statism of minimalizing the individual.

If an individual is not significant in a civic or national sense, then why would they matter much on a personal level either?

OVERWATCH
12-30-2006, 02:48 PM
This article is utter shite and anemic propaganda. What exactly does one (unknown) communist who supposedly molested his daughter prove? Nothing. You cannot build a case for anything out of one single case- ridiculous!

OVERWATCH
12-30-2006, 02:51 PM
Good post CWAS.

How common do you think incidences of child molestation and incest and other degeneracy is among those who practice or advocate extremely statist ideologies like communism? [As compared with populations that adhere more to individualism.]

There may be a connection due to a prevalent attitude in statism of minimalizing the individual.

If an individual is not significant in a civic or national sense, then why would they matter much on a personal level either?
Unless you have some evidence to back your blind assertion, you have nothing but the weakest speculation possible.

The exact opposite could be postulated with an equal amount of 'reasoning', but that does not make it even remotely fact.

wonder cow
12-30-2006, 02:54 PM
Unless you have some evidence to back your blind assertion, you have nothing but the weakest speculation possible.

It was more of a question than speculation.

The exact opposite could be postulated with equal "logic".

No.

OVERWATCH
12-30-2006, 03:01 PM
The exact opposite could be postulated with equal "logic".
No.
Sure it could. Since individualism is closely associated with selfish and myopic memes, such as made manifest in the decadent 'me generation' of the 70ies, it elevates one's own desires and feelings above all else; individualism tends to negate social responsibility; hyper-individualism, which libertarianism is representative of, is tolerant of all sorts of degeneracy, NAMBLA and beyond.

Steppenwolf
12-30-2006, 03:05 PM
Communist Beasts are opposed to the Family (its values and structure, which they label as mere erroneous social constructs). As such, I do not think they would view what we'd call incestual sex any more differently than sex in general.

wonder cow
12-30-2006, 04:15 PM
Since individualism is closely associated with selfish and myopic memes, such as made manifest in the decadent 'me generation' of the 70ies, it elevates one's own desires and feelings above all else; individualism tends to negate social responsibility; hyper-individualism, which libertarianism is representative of, is tolerant of all sorts of degeneracy, NAMBLA and beyond.

That is not the "exact opposite", as you stated.

The exact opposite

individualism tends to negate social responsibility

Actually, individualism neither precludes social responsibility nor discourages it. Some of the greatest philanthropist in the world are individualist.

libertarianism

Libertarians advocate their own forms of tyranny and degeneracy. Generally, I oppose them.

| I, CWAS
12-30-2006, 08:15 PM
Good post CWAS.

How common do you think incidences of child molestation and incest and other degeneracy is among those who practice or advocate extremely statist ideologies like communism? [As compared with populations that adhere more to individualism.]

There may be a connection due to a prevalent attitude in statism of minimalizing the individual.

If an individual is not significant in a civic or national sense, then why would they matter much on a personal level either?

Something tends to be off kilter about radical statists on the left (I think we are all too familiar with the problems of the radical right from Warren Jeffs to Tim McVeigh). I can't say common it is, but I don't see what moral objection they can have as communists want to destroy the nuclear family and essentially raise children collectively. This is combination with the ideals of birth control and free-love doesn't bode well for radical leftist morality. I think the only reason it isn't widely endorsed now is because of the overwhelming social rejection of it.

There is also the fact that communism and leftist philosophy in general is highly deterministic, so if the family is destroyed and incest is not socially condemned then they might negate the one rational objection that they could have: It is psychologically harmful to the child. The same can be said of homosexuals (although I don't want to equate adult homosexuality with pedophilia). Homosexuals have a higher instance of suicide, drug abuse and problems in general, because they are condemned in many societies and they turn this inward. The same can be said of sex offenders overall (not just pedophiles).

The question that must always be asked of radicals, left or right, is if society is going to be completely altered why should/would current morals survive the revolution when almost all of our current morals are not the exact embodiment as their antecedents.

Razikashvili
12-30-2006, 08:33 PM
This is typical of communists.
That's absurd and you know it. This is garbage. Move it to the lounge, please.

| I, CWAS
12-30-2006, 09:01 PM
Sure it could. Since individualism is closely associated with selfish and myopic memes, such as made manifest in the decadent 'me generation' of the 70ies, it elevates one's own desires and feelings above all else; individualism tends to negate social responsibility; hyper-individualism, which libertarianism is representative of, is tolerant of all sorts of degeneracy, NAMBLA and beyond.

This is incorrect. Individualism is neither here nor there on the issue. It simply states that a human can be a means unto themselves. Selfishness always has more negative manifestations under collectivism (see every dictatorship/monarchy is history). If a society is going to be excessively regulated those who like power have a clear path laid out for them: a servile, subjugated society. Libertarianism is filled with Christians and they are not Objectivists or Ancappers. They are mostly miniarchists and oppose social degeneracy. Lew Rockwell and Gary North are just two prime examples (there are many). Hippes and their 1970s disco, drug using descendants were simply social liberals.

OVERWATCH
12-30-2006, 11:26 PM
This is incorrect. Individualism is neither here nor there on the issue.

Communism is neither here nor there on the issue of child molestation, either. My weak hypothesis regarding some highly speculative correlation between a political ideology and pedophilia is in response to your even weaker hypothesis of the exact same nature.

Selfishness always has more negative manifestations under collectivism (see every dictatorship/monarchy is history).
I disagree. Individuals have become atomised by the materialistic, capitalistic, individualistic 'democracies', the obsession with 'human rights' has caused our cities to turn into vile slums, and advocates of free trade have ushered forth a massive population shift often featuring unassimilable immigrants, but always resulting in massive social upheaval and long-term problems.

If a society is going to be excessively regulated those who like power have a clear path laid out for them: a servile, subjugated society.
We already have that; modern, first world masses are servile and subjugated by nature of their fat living standards.

It simply states that a human can be a means unto themselves.

Libertarianism is filled with Christians and they are not Objectivists or Ancappers. They are mostly miniarchists and oppose social degeneracy. L
According to yourself; my experience, or the experience of others with libertarians may be different. Naturally, sexual degenerates are going to support political movements which will work towards making their deep-seated perversions available for practise, legal, and accepted.

As to your assertion that authoritarianism correlates with pedophilia- do you have any proof- hard evidence- or convincing data?

odin
12-31-2006, 12:19 AM
Personally, I reject any accusations based on "recovered memories."

| I, CWAS
12-31-2006, 12:20 AM
Communism is neither here nor there on the issue of child molestation, either. My weak hypothesis regarding some highly speculative correlation between a political ideology and pedophilia is in response to your even weaker hypothesis of the exact same nature.


Political ideology can be correlated with mental health, social standing, income, sexuality and so forth. Communism is a radical ideology that wants to abolish the nuclear family and yet is sketchy on why morals of a capitalist society would be cherry picked and held over. The only refutation communists offer is that heinous crimes will disappear with a change in material conditions.


I disagree. Individuals have become atomised by the materialistic, capitalistic, individualistic 'democracies', the obsession with 'human rights' has caused our cities to turn into vile slums, and advocates of free trade have ushered forth a massive population shift often featuring unassimilable immigrants, but always resulting in massive social upheaval and long-term problems.


When has this not been the case? No economy in the world is a free-market economy. At best there is neo-liberal, corporatist nonsense. People now are more valuable than ever, even if the market sees it in terms of labor. The Individual can choose where to engage in labor for remuneration and does not have to if he doesn't want to. This is extreme progress compared to the time when humans were seen as essential objects by the church, monarchs, and feudal lords. People are choosing their path. If one wants to reject society and go live a monastic life in America, they can. If they want to live a life of sex and drugs, they can (although there are the legal ramifications, but drugs are fairly easy to obtain). If one wants to dedicate themselves to their community, they are free to build a compound and live. There is nothing forcing a free-thinking Individual into being a consumerist.

As for immigration, if the government was doing its job (Securing the borders) then the cream of the crop could be selected and allowed to work. The problem is that the strongest opposition to the free-market comes from big business, and certain industries (namely agriculture) have a vested interest in the government not securing the borders.





We already have that; modern, first world masses are servile and subjugated by nature of their fat living standards.


See above. The masses have always been servile. Slavery, genocide, oppression of women, excessive taxation, etc., at no point has a society not been servile. There are short term cases such as post-revolution, but this never lasts. Most people are not politically/socially/economically conscious. North Korea and Saudi Arabia are headed by despots. The Chinese government is highly corrupt. Tyranny exists because the masses will always be servile. It's how human beings as a species are.


According to yourself; my experience, or the experience of others with libertarians may be different. Naturally, sexual degenerates are going to support political movements which will work towards making their deep-seated perversions available for practise, legal, and accepted.


The problem with that is that Libertarianism is a philosophy that has an ethical component. It does not seek to revolutionize morality. It is about free choice and consent.


As to your assertion that authoritarianism correlates with pedophilia- do you have any proof- hard evidence- or convincing data?

[1] I don't recall saying such a thing in the way you have said
[2] Molestation and Rape are about power, moreso than sex, authoritarianism is of course about power.
[3] Sexual degenerates can adhere to any ideology/relgion. My post was moreso concerned about the lack of moral condemnation from the radical left. Or, the inability to actually post a syllogism whereby it can be deemed unethical in a neo-society that has done away with the economic system, governmental system, social system, and other systems under the banner of ideological revolution.

For example, if radical Islamists took over America next week, it is safe to assume that homosexuality will become illegal and would be punished severely. This is because according to radical islamists interpretation of their holy book it is immoral. Communism does not offer this. The only way to condemn it is to admit the cultural mores are somehow simpatico with the ideology. But then why stop there? In fact, how can one start there? Communism is about a complete macrocosmic change. What happens when people disagree with its standards and overall changes?

Daniel Shays
12-31-2006, 05:35 AM
Communist Beasts are opposed to the FamilyWe beasts oppose the bourgeois family because it makes family life impossible for all but a shriveling fraction of the population. When the middle-class choose to homeschool, Christian fundamentalism and incest regularly find their way into the curriculum.Father of 15 faces prison in incest case (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/12/28/father_of_15_faces_prison_in_incest_case/)
Blaine Harden, Washington Post | December 28, 2006

SEATTLE -- Robert Hale, a Bible-toting father of 15 who calls himself Papa Pilgrim

[...]

he and his wife were home-schooling in an ultra-strict Christian way.

He said his children read only the Bible, always bathed with their clothes on, and were not allowed to see one another naked.

[...]

He pleaded no contest to multiple charges that he raped one of his daughters.

The plea, made three weeks before Hale was to face trial on 27 felony charges of rape, incest, and coercion,

[...]

Hale and his now-estranged wife, Kurina, who calls herself Country Rose, and their children, who all have names from the Bible, bought a 410-acre ranch

[...]

He grew up affluent in Fort Worth
The ruling class prefers to sequester its children from Helots and Perioikoi alike by utilizing private single-sex school barracks where pederasty is instigated.

When I was at school ... (http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1589948,00.html)
Al Alvarez, The Guardian | Wednesday October 12, 2005

John Peel's autobiography reveals that he was raped at Shrewsbury school in the 1950s. So was his experience typical? We asked seven prominent former public schoolboys to spill their dormitory secrets

...
(its values and structure, which they label as mere erroneous social constructs).They are 'mere erroneous social constructs' in a capitalist state. Contrast the 1960 Soviet divorce rate of 1.3 per 1,000 with the American rate of 2.2 per 1,000. An America that was still traditional, white, and Christian had a divorce rate 70% greater than the Soviet Union.

1. Correlates of Divorce in the U.S.S.R. Denis Peter Mazur. Vol. 6, No. 3 (Aug., 1969), pp. 279-286
As such, I do not think they would view what we'd call incestual sex any more differently than sex in general.False. The socialist family is an important extension of the state superstructure - any crimes against family members are crimes against the socialist state.

Incest could better be interpreted as a sexual expression of genetic fetishism with its political manifestation found in Nazism/Zionism. Adolf Hitler was sterile, had an incestuous affair with his niece, instituted a Mother cult, and considered himself "married to the German people." Such effete narcissism is savorless to a virile proletarian people.

Captain Marinesko
01-02-2007, 10:16 AM
Where is the Marxist document that sets destroying the nuclear family as a goal of the movement? One need only to read the Communist manifesto and see that the force destroying the family was, and still is- capitalism. Capitalism drives the mother out of the home, and separates them from the family. Communism provides women with a REAL choice, whether she wants to raise children at home or work while still having the opportunity to see her children.

I might also point out that in some Marxist kibbutzim the inhabitants voluntarily decided to set up special schools and institutions where children would be raised collectively, by professionals- based on the logic that trained professionals would be better at the job. There were a few side effects, but for the most part the children grew up rather well. It wouldn't work for everybody obviously, but if applied voluntarily on a larger scale, and directed by a centralized socialist movement, it could possibly achieve an even better state of morality.

It is important to remember that most anti-Communist, primarily American views of life "before the counter-culture" revolution are pure fantasy. Yes you could say that at least superficially, family values were more prominent. However, there was plenty of rape, molestation, whoremongering, etc. My personal belief is that people were just more discreet about it back then.